InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

4sleddogs

05/19/17 1:50 PM

#164809 RE: sissyjane1 #164797

I'm 99% in agreement with you. In all fairness however, I cannot discount the very slim chance (1% IMHO) the decision could go against SFOR. The Microsoft IPR deision set a powerful precedent. But every infringing company has its right to a fair hearing in which their lawyers and technical experts may prevail.I doubt they will but the possbility exists. The 99:1% odds are what any bookie would have given you when our little David, SFOR went up against the Goliath, MSFT.
icon url

B RY

05/19/17 2:08 PM

#164823 RE: sissyjane1 #164797

"IPR petitioners can assert only limited invalidity grounds (namely, novelty and obviousness based on prior art patents or printed publications)"

http://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/x/430292/Patent/Motion+to+Stay+Pending+IPR+Lessons+Learned+Three+Years+In